**Document:** Planning Officer Report Recommendations **Application:** 12/01174/B — Alterations and extensions to dwelling **Decision:** Permitted **Decision Date:** 2012-11-15 **Parish:** Lezayre **Document Type:** report / officer_report **Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/3287-lezayre-port-e-vullen-dwelling/documents/1278338 --- # Planning Officer Report Recommendations ### Officer's Report [Table omitted in markdown export] #### The Application Site 1. The application site is the residential curtilage of a three storey detached dwelling located within the Port-e-Vullen area of Maughold. The front elevation of the property looks out towards the sea whilst the rear elevation of the annex adjoining the rear of the property lies closest to the public thoroughfare. 2. The front elevation of the property has two columns of bay windows extending the full height of the buildings with semi-hexagonal roofing integrated into the main pitched roof of the dwelling. A large chimney stack is integrated into the roof design on each roof slope, at both ends of the roof. A semi-dormer window is positioned at second floor level on the front elevation, in between the bay windows, whilst two semi-dormer windows are positioned at second floor level of the principal rear elevation either side of the rear annex. A two storey lean-to extension adjoins the north-west facing side elevation of the annex and a single storey extension adjoins the annex on the opposite side elevation, both extensions have lean-to roofs. The rear elevation of the rear annex, the nearest part of the property to the public thoroughfare, has modern bay windows present at ground floor and first floor level. #### The Proposal 3. The proposal comprises alterations, the erection of extensions to rear annex, and the installation of solar panels to rear annex pitch roof. Each solar panel will be 1 metre in height and 2.4 metres in width. 4. The existing bay windows on the front elevation will be removed and replaced with large bay windows at ground floor and first floor level. A set of patio doors will be installed window the ground floor bay window. A balcony area (depth 1.5m) will be sited above the roof of the first floor bay window, which will be accessed by a set of patio doors at second floor level. The set of patio doors and adjoining glass panels will replace two existing windows. 5. The extension to the south-east wide elevation will be single storey and have a lean-to roof with two integrated roof-lights. Two uPVC casement windows will be incorporated into the side elevation of the extension and a doorway in the front elevation. The extension to the north-west side elevation will be single storey in height and have a lean-to roof. A set of doors will be incorporated into its front elevation. #### Planning History 6. The application site has not been the subject of any previous planning applications that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application. #### Planning Policy 7. In terms of land use designation under the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Provisional Order 1982 the application site is located within a wider area of land that is designated as predominantly residential use. 8. In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains one policy that is considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application. General Policy 2 states: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: - (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; - (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; - (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; - (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; - (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; - (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; - (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; - (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; - (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; - (j) can be provided with all necessary services; - (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; - (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; - (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and - (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption." 9. Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 states "As a general policy, in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general." ### Representations 10. Maughold Parish Commissioners have no objections to the planning application. 11. The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division do not oppose the planning application, stating that they consider the proposal to have no traffic management, parking or road safety implications. 12. The owner and/or occupant of Stoneleigh, which directly adjoins the application site, states that whilst they have no objection to the proposed development they wish to highlight the correct land ownership for the site and the existence of a shared right access through the application site into their property. They do not want the width between the extended dwelling and their access point to reduce as this would make access more difficult. ### Assessment 13. The three main considerations in the assessment of the planning application are i) impact on public amenity; ii) impact on private amenity; and iii) impact on highway safety. 14. In respect of impact on public amenity it can be seen that the dwelling is set back over 35 metres from the adjoining public highway. The proposed alteration and extension of the dwelling would have little effect on the appearance of the dwelling within the street scene and the overall effect on public amenity. As such, it is concluded that the impact of the proposed development on public amenity is acceptable. 15. As for impact on private amenity the majority of the proposed alteration and extension of the dwelling is either of a level or at a position that would have no significant impact on adjoining properties. Potential overlooking of neighbouring property from the proposed second floor balcony is limited by existing mature trees and hedges that restrict unobstructed views. Furthermore, the limited depth of this balcony (1.5m) limits its use. As such, it is concluded that the impact of the proposed development on private amenity is acceptable. 16. As part of the assessment of impact on private amenity it is appropriate to consider the issues raised by the owner and/or occupant of Stoneleigh. The highlighted land ownership is not a material planning consideration as the planning system does not regulate land ownership and the definition of the application site by the red line within a planning application does only that, it does not give or remove any land ownership or access rights. The granting of planning approval does not override any other non-planning consents, agreements or approvals that may be required. The concerns regarding a reduction in width between the dwelling and the access to Stoneleigh were put to the applicant's agent, with a suggestion that reducing the extent of the proposed extension to follow the footprint of the existing porch could be a reasonable compromise. However, the applicant's agent advised that the applicant wished to proceed with the planning application and proposed development in the submitted form. Whilst a reduction in the size of the proposed extension could readily address the concerns of the neighbour, as long as sufficient space remains to allow usable access, it is primarily a civil matter between respective landowners. Based on site visit it is apparent that whilst the proposed development would reduce the width between the dwelling and the access the remaining space would be sufficient to allow access. It would therefore be unreasonable to refuse the planning application on this basis. 17. In terms of impact on highway safety the proposed development does not alter existing vehicular access or parking arrangements for Port E Vullen House. As such, there is no impact from the proposed development on highway safety. The proposal is not considered to affect any other obvious material consideration. ### Recommendation 18. It is recommended that the planning application be approved ### Party Status 19. It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application should be afforded interested party status: Maughold Parish Commissioners; The owner and/or occupant of Stoneleigh. 20. It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application should not be afforded interested party status: The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division. ### Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 12.11.2012 ### Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal ## O : Notes attached to refusals C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice. C 2. This approval relates to drawing no.s 120903/1, 120903/2, 120903/3, 120903/4 and 120903/7 date stamped the 22nd August 2012. I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control / Development Control Manager/ Senior Planning Officer. Decision Made : Permitted Date : 15-11-12 ### Determining officer (delete as appropriate) Signed : ... Anthony Holmes Senior Planning Officer Signed : ... Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control Signed : ... Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer Signed : ... Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager --- *Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).* *Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/3287-lezayre-port-e-vullen-dwelling/documents/1278338*